Can We Just Assume USC-OSU Are Better Than ND-UM?

Looking back at last weekend's college football slate, there were two games that really stole the show. That of course, was Michigan-Notre Dame and USC-Ohio State.

Heading into the weekend, the USC-Ohio State game grabbed most of the attention in spite of the fact, that Michigan-Notre Dame is the oldest rivalry in college football.

Its understandable though.

In recent years, the Trojans and Buckeyes have clearly been better than the Wolverines and Irish. Although, it is a bit ironic that on the same day that Michigan and Notre Dame play each other, they also have their most hated rivals play each other.

With all that in mind, I think its generally assumed around the college football world that the game in Columbus featured two better teams than the game in Ann Arbor. Again, its understandable why the fans and media would assume that.

Does that mean they are right to assume it? I'm not sure. Yes, the Trojans and Buckeyes have clearly been better in recent years; but does that mean they are better this year?

Before you just assume that the answer is yes, let me ask you another question.

If you were in a coma for the past decade and just woke up before college football this year, what would you think?

In week one, you would have seen Notre Dame and Michigan destroy Nevada and Western Michigan respectively. You would have also seen Ohio State nearly blow a game against Navy. You would have also seen USC get off to a bit of a slow start against San Jose State.

Then when you get to these two games; the first one in Ann Arbor was an up and down the field game. You saw offenses put up a ton of points against defenses that completely shut down their opponents the week before.

Then, in the second game in Columbus, you saw another great game; but much more of a defensive struggle. That would make you wonder if these defenses were that good, or if the offenses were still developing. In the end, you may think its a little bit of both.

As any football fan would do, you would take a look at the four quarterbacks. Michigan and USC both have true freshmen. The difference is that Matt Barkley actually looks like a true freshman. On the other hand, Tate Forcier already looks like the face of the team; and will be for the next four years.

Ohio State QB, Terelle Pryor, still strikes of a QB still finding himself.

Finally, you look at Notre Dame's Jimmy Clausen. Since you were in a coma, you didn't see his first two years. But all you see now is a potential Heisman candidate.

You would then do a little research and see that both Ohio State and USC lost a lot to graduation and the NFL. You would also see that Notre Dame and Michigan now have guys who have been playing since they were freshmen.

Based on all that, I'm not sure you can just assume that USC and Ohio State are better than Michigan and Notre Dame.

The best thing about it is that we will eventually find out. USC and Notre Dame play in about a month and Michigan and Ohio State will end the season as they always do.